How justified is the prosecution of Philippine's Duterte?

Former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte was arrested in Manila on Tuesday, March 12, by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in connection with his administration's years-long war on drugs.

The arrest follows mounting international pressure over the controversial campaign, which reportedly led to the deaths of individuals. Many of these killings occurred in Davao City, where Duterte had previously served as mayor before assuming the presidency.

But how justified is the legal pursuit of Duterte?

During Duterte’s presidency from 2016 to 2022, his war on drugs led to thousands of deaths, with official figures standing at 6,000 to over 27,000 as reported by human rights groups and investigative journalists. Many of these killings were allegedly carried out by police officers or vigilantes, often without due process.

The catch is that victims were frequently poor and marginalised individuals, raising concerns about class-based extrajudicial violence.

International organizations, including the United Nations and the International Criminal Court (ICC), have argued that these killings could amount to crimes against humanity. The ICC formally opened an investigation, asserting that the scale and pattern of the killings show systemic abuse, not isolated incidents.

On the other hand, Duterte has vehemently rejected the legitimacy of the ICC’s jurisdiction over the years, citing Philippine sovereignty. In 2019, Duterte withdrew the Philippines from the Rome Statute, the treaty that established the ICC, though the Court argues it retains jurisdiction over crimes committed while the country was still a member.

The former leader has also consistently maintained that he only ordered police to kill in self-defence, firmly defending the drug crackdown throughout his presidency. He has repeatedly told his supporters that he was willing to "rot in jail" if it meant eliminating illegal drugs from the Philippines.

What lies ahead of the leader at The Hague?